1,000 exemption argument NJ

[btgand]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NJ

I recently had my bank account drained due to a judgement from many years ago. I filed for the $1,000 exemption under NJ law. The plaintiff's attorney wrote a letter stating that "an exemption is not to be construed as a means of escaping the first $1,000 of a judgement. Instead, such exemption has been designed to prevent a creditor from seeking payment by acquiring the last $1,000 in personal property from an otherwise completely destitute debtor"

They are requesting bank statements that show the balance is zero. That's no problem because they did clear out the account (Checking and savings, linked).

I have a court date and I plan to go with the back statements that show a zero balance (actually, now a negative balance).

My questions are: Is that the case? I've read and re-read the law and I don't see that part. Do you think just showing the bank statements will be enough.

Thank you!

 

[Zigner]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? NJ

I recently had my bank account drained due to a judgement from many years ago. I filed for the $1,000 exemption under NJ law. The plaintiff's attorney wrote a letter stating that "an exemption is not to be construed as a means of escaping the first $1,000 of a judgement. Instead, such exemption has been designed to prevent a creditor from seeking payment by acquiring the last $1,000 in personal property from an otherwise completely destitute debtor"

They are requesting bank statements that show the balance is zero. That's no problem because they did clear out the account (Checking and savings, linked).

I have a court date and I plan to go with the back statements that show a zero balance (actually, now a negative balance).

My questions are: Is that the case? I've read and re-read the law and I don't see that part. Do you think just showing the bank statements will be enough.

Thank you!

I don't understand your question. According to what you posted, $1,000 of what's in your account is exempt. The other attorney is saying the same thing.

 

[btgand]

I don't understand your question. According to what you posted, $1,000 of what's in your account is exempt. The other attorney is saying the same thing.

The other attorney is saying that I can only get the money back if I can prove they left me with a zero balance. I'm wondering what the basis is for that requirement.

 

[tranquility]

I don't understand your question. According to what you posted, $1,000 of what's in your account is exempt. The other attorney is saying the same thing.

No. The attorney accepts the exemption:
http://law.justia.com/codes/new-jersey/2009/title-2a/2a-17/2a-17-19
protects $1,000 in assets. He claims it does not protect $1,000 in each "pot".

Imagine the following.

OP has $1,000 in bank account #1.
OP has $1,000 in bank account #2.
OP has $1,000 in Cash.
OP has a vehicle worth $1,000.

The attorney is saying that he can levy any of the above for $1,000 and be paid even if the OP were to claim exemption. The statute is not designed to render the first $1,000 of a levy moot, but to protect a debtor's last $1,000.

The OP believes that if the attorney files a levy any one of the assets, that particular asset is protected up to $1,000 with a claim of exemption.

I can't find an easy answer on a quick search.

Info edit:
I found something that may inform. At http://lawrev.state.nj.us/enforcementofjudgments/eojM041204.pdf is a paper suggesting changes to the law of exemptions. However, in the comments (emphasis mine):

The current personal property exemption is updated in proposed subsections (a)(3) and (a)(4).
Wearing apparel of the judgment debtor, other than furs and jewelry, is exempt. At present, there is a general
exemption for $1,000 worth of personal property. The $1000 amount has not been revised since 1973 and
covers far less property than it did when written. Subsections (a)(3) and (a)(4) follow the recommendation of
the August 17, 1993 “Report of the Supreme Court Committee on Post-Judgment Collection Procedures in the
Special Civil Part.” The committee, chaired by the Hon. Nicholas G. Mandak, A.J.S.C., judged that the
amounts given in subsections (a)(3) and (a)(4) are “required to ensure that debtors are not deprived of bare
necessities to exist for one month and maintain a minimal household.” Post-Judgment Collection Procedures
Report at 47. Inherently, any specific dollar amount is affected by inflation. To obviate the need for periodic
revision of the section, subsections (a)(3) and (a)(4) provide that the exemption amounts are to be adjusted for
inflation. Subsection (b) sets out the method for the adjustment. This method is now used to adjust other
statutory limits, such as the threshold for awarding without bids public school contracts (N.J.S.A. 18A:18A-
3), local public contracts (N.J.S.A. 40A:11-3), and state contracts (N.J.S.A. 52:34-7).